Finally, rsync is capable of limiting the bandwidth consumed during a transfer, a useful feature that few other standard file transfer protocol offer. With a scheduling utility such as cron , one can even schedule automated encrypted rsync-based mirroring between multiple host computers and a central server.
A utility called rdiff uses the rsync algorithm to generate delta files with the difference from file A to file B like the utility diff , but in a different delta format. The delta file can then be applied to file A, turning it into file B similar to the patch utility. Unlike diff, the process of creating a delta file has two steps: first a signature file is created from file A, and then this relatively small signature and file B is used to create the delta file.
Also unlike diff, rdiff works well with binary files. Using rdiff, a utility called rdiff-backup has been created, capable of maintaining a backup mirror of a file or directory either locally or remotely over the network, on another server. It works by generating the hashes for each block in advance, encrypting them, and storing them on the server, then retrieving them when doing an incremental backup.
The rest of the data is also stored encrypted for security purposes. A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 19, UTC Thu by glennc99 guest, [ Link ] So, if I understand you correctly, you've discovered that a tool optimized for bringing two large, mostly-similar directory structures into a completely similar state is not the best one to use when you're trying to copy a large tree into an empty target. A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 19, UTC Thu by tajyrink subscriber, [ Link ] I don't think that's interesting, but how badly ondemand works is interesting.
In the end I gave up and yanked cpufreq out of my kernel config entirely. Still things to discuss 5. Comments on really old articles have a high probability of being spam, so it's tempting to turn them off.
Based on my experiences I'd think that's actually a moderately common use case. The "destination directory is completely empty" then becomes a special case of "some large files to copy entirely". Different platforms would require different command-line options and then screw up different things.
It was insane. Tar, on the other hand, pretty much got it right on every platform. A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 19, UTC Thu by pj subscriber, [ Link ] One advantage is that it's easily modified to work over ssh: tar cf -. A look at rsync performance Posted Jul 29, UTC Sun by bentpointer guest, [ Link ] I don't think the tar extract works with files with spaces in the name. A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 19, UTC Thu by evgeny subscriber, [ Link ] There is one thing tar and cp -a do differently, which, depending on what you do could be either a feature or a misfeature.
This can be overridden with the --numeric-owner flag. Was bitten by this once A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 25, UTC Wed by roelofs guest, [ Link ] Nowadays cp -a works well everywhere in my experience so there's no need to resort to tar. A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 19, UTC Thu by valhalla subscriber, [ Link ] cp -p preserves mode, ownership and timestamps, and the --preserve option can be used to do a finer selection of what should be preserved.
However i am still confused as many of the notes in the manual page refer to topics I know nothing about. I know which I'd prefer. And the tar technique still leaves you having to figure out which files no longer belong and remove them. It doesn't help. The amount of user and system time is still incredibly high compared to a simple cp.
The -W doesn't change anything there unfortunately. A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 20, UTC Fri by dlang guest, [ Link ] my first reaction on reading this is that the processes are stalling, and the behavior you describe to improve performance sounds like it's on the same tack.
I know there's a way to tell ssh to use a less CPU-heavy cipher but I always forget how. It's always a problem if you launch a 'cp -au' because the mtime of the file is only set once the copy is finished for obvious reasons , so interrupting the copy leaves you with a broken file that's newer than anything else, and thus you cannot recover unless you find out which file it is using find is an option, but can be slow over a big number of files.
I wouldn't trust netcat for data I cared about A look at rsync performance Posted Sep 8, UTC Wed by daenzer subscriber, [ Link ] Indeed, this seems like an rsync performance bug that should get fixed.
By using the performance frequency governor on both client and server throughput is more than doubled on a gigabit network. I have a filesystem full of home directories. A G filesystem with about G filled. Doing an rsync between it and a backup server takes over 24 hours even though less than a GB typically changes between backups. Worse it consumes 1. I use -avP --delete to sync a multi-terabyte tree and it performs admirably.
Again quote from the manpage: Note that -a does not preserve hardlinks, because finding multi- ply-linked files is expensive. You must separately specify -H. Please consider signing up for a subscription and helping to keep LWN publishing. The default is -2, which is nobody on many systems, but not on mine, which is why uid is defined explicitly.
You may specify either a user name or a numeric user ID; the default is -2 nobody on many systems. If specified globally, this value will be applied to each module that doesn't contain its own max connections setting.
The default value is zero, which places no limit on concurrent connections. I do not recommend leaving it at zero, as this makes Denial-of-Service DoS attacks easier. Since timeout controls how long in seconds rsync will wait for idle transactions to become active again, this also represents a DoS exposure and should likewise be set globally and per module, when a given module needs a different value for some reason. The default value is yes. The third group of options defines the module [public].
These, as you can see, are indented. When rsync parses rsyncd. Let's examine each of the module [public]'s options, one at a time. No arguments or other modifiers belong here: just the name you wish to call this module, in this case public.
By default there is no comment. Each accepts a comma-delimited list of FQDNs or IP addresses from which you wish to explicitly allow or deny connections. If only hosts allow is specified, then any client whose IP or name matches will be allowed to connect, and all others will be denied. If only hosts deny is specified, then any client whose IP or name matches will be denied, and all others will be allowed to connect.
If, however, both hosts allow and hosts deny are present, hosts allow will be parsed first, and if the client's IP or name matches, the transaction will be passed.
If the IP or name in question didn't match hosts allow, then hosts deny will be parsed, and if the client matches there, the transaction will be dropped. Requests from Requests from the host near. Everything else will be allowed. This probably enhances performance more significantly than security; as a means of access control, the underlying file permissions are more important. Of rsync's command-line options, only checksum has an obvious security ramification.
It tells rsync to calculate CPU-intensive MD5 checksums in addition to its normal rolling checksums, so blocking this option reduces certain DoS opportunities. Although the compress option has a similar exposure, you can use the dont compress option to refuse it rather than the refuse options option. Enable Sysadmin. Sysadmin tools: Using rsync to manage backup, restore, and file synchronization. Rsync is a command-line tool for copying files and directories between local and remote systems that should be in every Linux sysadmin's toolbox.
Image by analogicus from Pixabay. What to read next Image. When backups fail: A cautionary sysadmin tale. When anything fails, fingers start to point. Here's one story of failed backups and inherited responsibility. Posted: August 11, Author: Ken Hess Red Hat. Linux stories: When backups saved the day. Are your backups running too long? Would the time required for a full recovery put your business at risk? Here's a better solution.
Posted: May 7, Linux housekeeping: Handling archives and backups.
0コメント